The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Overwhelming Majority of Voters Think Fraud Occurred
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Over sixty million voters think the presidential election turned on voter fraud:

That’s the more sensationalist reading of the results, anyway. Presumably, “influenced the outcome” should necessarily be interpreted as “changed the outcome”, else the “influence” is immaterial. But it is conceivable some of these voters think fraud tipped one state or kept another state from flipping without changing who made it to 270 electoral votes. In other words, it changed the electoral score but not the electoral victor. It’s possible, but it seems doubtful most people smelling a rat think that.

In the first few days after the election, the establishment talking point was that no evidence of fraud existed. Though the walls had crumbled, the gate keepers were sitting in their parapets, forbidding anyone from passing through while everybody walked by. Those with access to the internet experienced a few days of surreality as the corporate media denied what they saw with their own lying eyes. The emperor was in a birthday suit, but CNN swore his were the most beautiful clothes:

Despite the best efforts of the ring-kissing, bootlicking journalistic class to squelch truth on behalf of power, by the time this poll was conducted awareness of the shenanigans was ubiquitous. Even among Biden voters, fewer than 1-in-3 believe the election was a clean one.

This blogger guesses the assessment of most Biden voters is the correct one. Of course every election includes some level of fraud, but this time it wasn’t a trivial amount. If I can be proven incorrect, I hope to be. The audacity of an establishment that spent the better part of four years disputing the results of the 2016 election without any credible evidence now demanding uncertified election results be hastily certified and the apparent outcome accepted immediately in the face of credible evidence of fraud, irregularities, and errors is truly staggering.

The inauguration is over two months away. If there is nothing to find, what’s the harm in looking? Isn’t convincing those sixty million highly skeptical voters that Trump lost fair and square the first step towards achieving the unity we’ve heard so many calls for over the last several days?

Parenthetically, two cheers for YouGov’s consistency. The outfit regularly oversamples Democrats. It consequently tends to predict outcomes on the left end of the polling consensus, a consensus that itself is to the left of reality. Biden is set to win the popular vote by about 5 points. YouGov’s survey was comprised of 797 Biden voters and 597 Trump voters, though, a distribution suggesting Biden won the popular vote by 14 points. See, consistent! The crosstabs are good and the sub-group information has a lot of utility, so we’re sticking with them.

 
Hide 72 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. dfordoom says: • Website

    Over sixty million voters think the presidential election turned on voter fraud:

    It’s amazing how people here think all the election polls were totally totally wrong and yet they take complete BS polls like this seriously. Opinion polls tell us the opinions of people who choose to respond to opinion polls. That’s all they tell us.

    The people who choose to respond to opinion polls such as this are a very small minority (response rates are dismal and the sampling is ludicrously unrepresentative) and they are extremely likely to be the very small minority of people who are intensely politically engaged.

    These types of polls tell us nothing about how the average person thinks.

  2. Rosie says:

    The inauguration is over two months away. If there is nothing to find, what’s the harm in looking? Isn’t convincing those sixty million highly skeptical voters that Trump lost fair and square the first step towards achieving the unity we’ve heard so many calls for over the last several days?

    Even in the unlikely event that there was no fraud, the establishment would very much like to establish a consensus that doubting election outcomes is “dangerous” and “paranoid.” That way they leave their options for the future open. Trump must investigate every angle of this, because complacency despite the appearance of fraud would embolden TPTB. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if this were a dry run.

  3. Thomm says:

    I called it. I said at least 20 times that ‘barring massive vote fraud, Trump wins’ :

    https://www.unz.com/?s=fraud&Action=Search&ptype=all&commentsearch=only&commenter=Thomm

    I said this as far back as August 2019 :

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/polling-alone/#comment-3415552

    If the election were run fairly, Trump would have won all of his 2016 states, plus at least NV. That means at least 310 EVs.

    But now, no matter what happens, half of all voters will believe that the Presidency was ‘stolen’. It is better if Democrats are the ones made to believe that.

    • Agree: Joseph Doaks
  4. Jtgw says:

    Interesting. I agree Biden probably won through fraud. Having said that, fraud was only viable strategy because margins so tight; as Brad Griffin here argues, Trump lost a lot of working and middle class white voters this time around and apparently only the upper middle class voted for him by a clear margin. So I’m sympathetic to argument that Trump too incompetent a standard bearer for white working and middle class interests.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
  5. Twinkie says:

    You know, back in the old days, even with overwhelming pro-left sympathies, journalists would have described the situation as “Biden appears to win the presidency, Trump campaign alleges voter fraud” or some such headline, in other words, be more neutral in tone and description.

    But now, just about every news outlet seems to use the phrases “baseless allegations of fraud from Trump” and “even his aides [always anonymous] say that there is no evidence of fraud.”

    It’s like they are terrified that there might actually be fraud and Biden might not be the real winner. They are behaving like guilty people (or accomplices to guilty people) and are going out of their way to overdo the apologia.

    In any case, whatever the mask of “objectivity” or neutrality there was, it has fallen off completely and most people can see the overt allegiance of these institutions, the media included.

    • Agree: iffen, Audacious Epigone
  6. Derer says:

    The evidence of vote scam is in the timeline on Trump leads, for instance in Pennsylvania. It was mathematically impossible for Biden to overtake the lead only if mail-in ballots went unreasonably 100% for him.

  7. neutral says:

    The US election system is arguably one of the worst in the world, I am beginning to believe this is a feature and not a bug. Having such a shambolic system makes it easy to manipulate it in many ways, most in power would not want to remove such useful tools.

    • Agree: Joseph Doaks
    • Replies: @Dr. DoomNGloom
    , @Wielgus
  8. Fraud or not, the real tactic that threw this election where it normally would not have gone was the exploitation of fear of one corona virus to establish mail-in voting.

    “Mailing-it-in” attracts lazy voters, who are more likely to be Democrats and minorities. This was understood, and it is the reason why the Establishment used it to dump Trump.

    Count this as just more damage from the cure that is worse than the virus that causes no harm to something like 99.9% of the people who catch it. “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” They used this one but good, and it is arguably not even much of a crisis.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Twinkie
  9. LondonBob says:
    @Jtgw

    Trump won about ten million more voters, not convinced he lost anybody.

    • Replies: @Jtgw
  10. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Buzz Mohawk

    “Mailing-it-in” attracts lazy voters, who are more likely to be Democrats and minorities. This was understood, and it is the reason why the Establishment used it to dump Trump.

    Would you agree that the single biggest mistake Trump made was discouraging his own supporters from voting by mail? He may have cost himself the votes of hundreds of thousands of elderly voters who were too scared to vote in person.

    Mail-in voting was going to happen. Lots of people were going to be very reluctant to vote in person. It was madness on the part of the Trump campaign to deprive themselves of the chance of capturing all those potential Trump voters who were not going to vote in person.

    “Mailing-it-in” attracts lazy voters perhaps, but it also attracts elderly voters many of whom genuinely find it difficult to vote in person.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  11. @dfordoom

    It’s amazing how people here think all the election polls were totally totally wrong and yet they take complete BS polls like this seriously.

    Indeed, the old gremlin of confirmation bias. Accept if we like it, reject if we don’t.

    The polls tell us what the pollsters say that we believe. Who are we to argue?

    Thinking people might draw their own conclusions independently.

  12. Jtgw says:
    @LondonBob

    Thing is that his share of the black vote increased. It was share of white male vote that went down, which is hard to square with idea that his loss entirely due to fraud in knee-grow districts.

  13. @neutral

    I’m all for throwing Trump under the bus, in return for two factor ID in person voting.
    Only in person can prevent undue influence on the voter. Only 2-factor can prevent ballot stuffing with high reliability.

    That is, person shows up, signs the role, AND provides the physical token from the voter ID card or perhaps from a biometric such as fingerprint or retinal scan. Ballot counts must reconcile with voter counts.

    The risk of preventing someone from voting must be balanced against
    1) the damage that a false vote does to everyone eases vote, AND
    2) the far more serious damage to the electoral process when substantial portions of the public lose faith in the credibility.

    While we think the calls “voter suppression” ring hollow, I’m willing to trade this election for the future. When push comes to shove, the “winners” almost always make the Faustian bargain for today.

    The fun part is a Biden presidency may be it’s own reward. Odds on the mid-terms?

  14. AE — I’m a little frustrated that you do not address the valid arguments your commenters make about election fraud. I am probably the most enduring commenter here, having been with you for much longer than a decade.

    There is a difference that really would swing the election, and that is invalidation of mail-in ballots in accordance with usual past practice. Typically these have been rejected at around a 3% rate and in some COVID primaries in 2020 in New York, 20% of mail-in ballots were rejected as a flood of unrequested ballots led to a huge amount of junk.

    When unrequested ballots are sent en masse by the millions, tons of junk ballots will come back. Signature matching is the minimum of checking. Without that, there is literally no evidence at all that the ballot was filled out by the voter in question. And yet, all of these were counted.

    In Pennsylvania in 2020, only 0.03% of mail-in ballots were rejected. If a more reasonable 3% of mail-ins were rejected, and the state would have gone the other way. Ditto for Arizona, Georgia and others. And in fact, probably something like 10% of mail-ins could have have been rejected given how junky unrequested ballots can be. In fact, the rate of rejection should have been far higher than in the past because the quality of unrequested ballots is far lower.

    In other words, with any reasonable level of vetting on mail-in ballots, Trump certainly wins.

    And reiterating my comments from earlier:
    “(1) It has been widely reported and commented on that Trump did considerably better among both blacks and Hispanics in 2020 than 2016 and not quite as well among white men in 2020 as in 2016.

    Then there should have been a marked red shift in the cities in 2020, which is where most blacks and Hispanics live. Where is it?

    Trump may have done 4% better with blacks and 4% better with Hispanics in 2020 than in 2016.
    http://www.vox.com/2020/11/4/21537966/trump-black-voters-exit-polls
    http://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/how-trump-grew-his-support-among-latinos/617033/

    A place like Milwaukee is 2/3 black and Hispanic and Biden does better there instead of 3-4% worse as you would expect?

    (2) Cheating might not be simple Biden vote dumps. Rather it could be “more of the same” in cities or similar areas. To bank tons of votes for Biden, you just need more votes in the cities in a similar proportion to what already came in.

    In this case, turnout numbers would tell the tale. And indeed turnouts are extraordinary. Turnout was 51% in Cleveland but somehow 84% in demographically similar Milwaukee. What?

    To quote Steve Cortes:
    “For Wisconsin overall, the turnout was above 90% of registered voters. Even in a state with same-day registration, such a number seems implausible. After all, in Australia, a place where voting is mandatory, and failing to vote is punishable with stiff fines, the total turnout for the most recent election was still only 92%.”

  15. @dfordoom

    I agree with you.

    At that point I wasn’t paying much attention to what he was saying, so I didn’t know he discouraged his own supporters from voting by mail. Just because I voted for him doesn’t mean I wasn’t capable of tuning him out. (And you can see why I was.)

    Still, I doubt he discouraged a number anywhere close to how many lazy ass (and mass-hysteria-prone) Dumbocrats mailed it in.

  16. To summarize:

    The steal is certainly real. Trump voters are correct. The outcome was certainly changed.

    The steal took the form of first sending tens of millions of ballots unrequested and then accepting essentially all the crap that came back including millions of mail-in ballots nationwide that would never have passed muster using ordinary standards of the past for judging whether mail-in ballots are valid.

    Trump wins easily in an election run with a bare minimum of rules. It seems the number of checks that a ballot was valid in PA and other swing states was essentially zero.

    Further, Trump still has a path for victory if he can force states to vet the ballots and do proper signature verification on them. Biden won only because millions of sketchy ballots were counted.

    • Replies: @Brian Reilly
    , @V. Hickel
  17. “All this was inspired by the principle – which is quite true in itself – that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.”

    Funny how the GOP is profiting from what Hitler realized back in 1923. Maybe in tomorrow’s armed Oathkeeper invasion of DC, they will create the November Heroes needed for the next stage of their assault on America.

    • Disagree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  18. anon[375] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom

    Would you agree that the single biggest mistake Trump made was discouraging his own supporters from voting by mail?

    No.

    What part of “fake votes by fake people” is difficult for you to understand?

    Now we have “fake votes by people who have changed their name”, too.

    #Maidengate

    Much has been revealed, more will soon be seen.

  19. The election offices, swear there is no election fraud. Ya know, the people who’s entire jobs are to make sure the election runs smoothly. Surely, they’re not going to say they did a crappy job, right?

    What election official is going to stand up and say “YES, we let enough fraud through to flip the elections in our state and I was in charge of it”.

    Also, they’re like “NO FRAUD” because “I SAID SO”. Followed up with “get a warrant in order to look” and then “you have no proof” (you need to look to get the proof…)

    I do not trust anyone in government to tell the truth without verification that they did. In this case, we have hard ballots we can count. We have software which, it appears (see gateway pundit’s top story) to have switched or lost votes for Trump. We have people, on signed statements, saying that fraud happened, we have whistleblowers about the software.

    Why the rush to certify? Why the blatant disregard to the vote tally questions? Surely, if you have nothing to hide and the ballots match the reported totals, there is no harm in a manual hand recount to validate the reported totals?

    What are they hiding?

    • Replies: @Adam Smith
  20. Dr. Doom says:

    You’d have to be retarded to believe Stupid Joe Biden outperformed Obama.

    This level of fraud is not concealable. Its not believable.

    War is the way out of this corruption. Only War will do now.

    All the system rats here hope and pray they will get away with this.

    You won’t. At the very least you can expect a complete lack of support from the workers.

    A general strike would bring this bankrupt system crashing down.

    A War will show how little support there is for this corrupt bankrupt “empire”.

    Even the Left wants there to be a revolution. This system is Doomed.

  21. The 9 justices of the USA Supreme Court, have multiple motives to trash team Biden for vote fraud, aside from 6 of the 9 justices being appointed by Republicans, 3 of them by Trump, and obviously owing Trump a favour. There are also:

    Biden’s personal attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas, and Biden-Harris threats to destroy the authority of the US Supreme Court by adding as many new judges as necessary.

    Conservative black intellectual Clarence Thomas is the longest-serving Justice on the US Supreme Court, sworn in in 1991. His nomination was aggressively fought by then-Senator Joe Biden, managing hearings in what Thomas called “a national disgrace … a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves.”

    Biden’s personal attacks on Thomas, then a Federal Appeals judge, strike all Supreme Court judges as threatening to judicial authority. Their view is that no judge should be publicly humiliated in this manner.

    Finally, current Supreme Court justices resent how, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, in classic Bolshevik fashion, have indulged thinking about ‘packing’ the US Supreme Court, adding 3 or more to the current 9 justices, to ensure it will rubber-stamp any Democratic Party programme items.

    US judges do not want their ‘supreme powers’ to be torn away from them. Packing the court destroys its significance, making the Justices into mere rubber-stamp clerks. The existing judges do not want this; Biden-Harris are obviously a threat to them

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  22. @brabantian

    Reason #4: Kamala Harris’s reprehensible attacks on Bret Kavanaugh, her enthusiastic, grating, hateful participation in what was a show trial of the same type leveled at Clarence Thomas by Biden.

    If the putative election theft is not stopped by the court, Harris, a sociopath who whored her way into politics, will soon be our president.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Adam Smith
  23. A123 says:

    Visual aide to understand where we are in the recount process.

    PEACE 😇
     

  24. Do you seriously expect me to believe there was anti-Trump “fraud” on the scale of 2-3 points’ margin in nearly 45 states? The “fraud” narrative is so dumb. Nearly every state in the country swung against Trump. It would be impossible for him to win the election under such conditions. The states that swung toward Trump -Hawaii, always a pro-incumbent state, Utah, filled with Mormons, Florida, filled with Cubans, Arkansas, regressing to norm following its Clinton home state effect, and Mississippi, filled with Blacks -are highly demographically unusual, to say the least. If anything, Trump lost Wisconsin by too little, not by too much. The voters in Dane County, Oakland County, Maricopa County, and Allegheny County that rejected Trump did so in full awareness that he was a disaster on the economy and killed one in a thousand Americans. He held on to the White working class and gained among Latinos because of his “law and order” tweets and because, frankly, these people do not have very high IQs.

    • Disagree: Adam Smith
    • Troll: VinnyVette
  25. nebulafox says:

    OT:

    https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/11/outgoing-syria-envoy-admits-hiding-us-troop-numbers-praises-trumps-mideast-record/170012/

    “We were always playing shell games to not make clear to our leadership how many troops we had there,” Jeffrey said in an interview. The actual number of troops in northeast Syria is “a lot more than” the roughly two hundred troops Trump initially agreed to leave there in 2019.”

    When the POTUS-*the Commander in Chief of the armed forces*-says we are done with a military operation, there’s one and only one acceptable answer from a general or bureaucrat: “Yes, sir!”. This is not legislation in the Senate, this is the military: there’s no negotiation! He’s THEIR BOSS, THEIR COMMANDER. They don’t like it, they resign. This is the one trump card the American people have to play with our foreign adventures, that reality that they elect the person who holds the final call every four years. They’ve taken that away-and as a result, we must assume that any sort of foreign commitment will result in a permanent presence.

    I propose a humble amendment to the US Constitution: anybody caught doing stuff like this, and any journalist who aids them in lying to their superiors or the American people, have to themselves serve as a front-line private in the conflict they advocated. You’ll see the enthusiasm go down fast and the withdrawals tick up once that gets going.

  26. @E. Harding

    … he was a disaster on the economy and killed one in a thousand Americans.

    LOL. Are you upset that he tried to stop the economic and industrial bleeding out of the United States? Were you afraid you might not be able to continue buying cheap goods made with cheap labor?

    And are you disappointed that the bad, orange man didn’t have you and the rest of us locked up at home, that he didn’t just further kill all productive activity to protect you from one corona virus that likely will not harm you at all if you are reasonably healthy and not elderly?

    Do you even know how many Americans die in a typical year from things like flu viruses and even complications from pneumonia — particularly the elderly and unhealthy? Subtract that from your “one in a thousand” and you get a significantly smaller number. Did Donny go out the shoot that remaining number himself? Are you mad he didn’t personally create a cure, with help from his son Barron and a chemistry set?

    He held on to the White working class and gained among Latinos…

    Who have reasons to vote for protections of their livelihoods and against globalist policies that will now be back worse than ever. And you should be happy, because now you will get more Latinos than ever.

    … these people do not have very high IQs.

    Look in the mirror.

    Mail-in-votes, real or not, elected Biden/HARRIS.

    Mail-in voting was sold to Americans through fear of a virus that leaves the vast majority of them unharmed.

    Mail-in-voting was known to be more popular among Democrats, both because they are lazy and because they are more prone to mass hysteria stoked by media hype. People like you.

    If they had not been able to stay at home and “mail-it-in” like the mediocrities that they are, they would not have produced that 2-3 point margin of which you speak.

    • Agree: Adam Smith, Joseph Doaks
  27. @dfordoom

    Dfor, I don’t think there was any chance that Trump would be selected for another term. Not elected, but selected. Biden was carefully selected not to serve as POTUS but to be the screen in front of the people who actually run things. They selected Trump over HRC in 2016, to the surprise an consternation of everyone. Now that a suitable empty suit is in place, there is no need for Trump.

    TPTB have it all this time. They don’t need anyone not on their team, and they don’t need many of them either. Fascinating times.

    • Agree: Adam Smith
  28. @nebulafox

    One of the reasons why the boomers of the 1960s protested against the Vietnam War was because they could be drafted into service and have to fight in it. Many of them were, and over 50,000 died.

    Now, the very same types of people support our foreign wars or just ignore them — because they and their children can’t be forced to fight them. They know that sheer economic pressure, caused by the globalist, high immigration, high foreign trade, cheap labor policies, which they also support, is probably the biggest motivator for good people at lower economic levels than they to join the military and take their chances.

  29. Talha says:

    Somewhat off topic…but, LOOOOL!

    Women of color voting with their feet (their sheets?!).

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    , @Rosie
  30. @Kaosweaver

    Why the rush to certify? Why the blatant disregard to the vote tally questions?
    What are they hiding?

    They’re not hiding anything.
    They’re blatantly asserting their power.

    I lost all confidence in voting 20 years ago after I downloaded a few different versions of Diebold’s GEMS software and installed them to test it out. In very little time I figured out about 8 different ways to hack the election. I even wrote a simple script that you could put on a thumbdrive to change the vote tallies to anything you wanted. You don’t even have to work with the GEMS software to do the manipulation as the election data is stored in a microsoft access database. I was amazed how little time and effort it took to do this. I may have spent an hour tinkering with the 3 different versions I had before I deleted GEMS from my machine. If I had spent more time on this, I could have come up with some nifty or exotic ways to manipulate the vote in a truly undetectable way. If I could do this in such a short time, imagine what properly motivated people could do.

    I have no faith in other voting software being less hackable.

    I have no faith in the honesty or integrity of election “officials”.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  31. @Talha

    … voting with their feet…

    Well, sure, if the guys are into feet.

    • LOL: Talha
  32. @DanHessinMD

    Dan, There is no one of any import to make or even listen to the real case for a hard re-examination of mail in ballots, applying existing laws and regulations. No significant Republican will fight for that, no attorney, no judge will hear it, and no SCOTUS justice will be allowed to cast a dispositive vote on it. The powers-that-be have this one sewed up.

    The theft is clear, obvious and agreed upon. Everyone knows that the fix is in. Just like OJ, it was over before the jury ever got seated.

  33. V. Hickel says:
    @DanHessinMD

    my signature was on the envelope, not the ballot itself. if they didnt save the envelopes….

  34. Overwhelming Majority of Voters Think

    [!] This statement is disputed

    Feeling is more common than thinking these days.

  35. “I called it. I said at least 20 times that ‘barring massive vote fraud, Trump wins’ ”

    And I think you are correct. And if they secured the ballots and are willing to trunch through everyone of them — I think they will find it.

  36. @E. Harding

    Trump killed 1 in 1000 Americans? Fuck off troll.

    • Replies: @Bragadocious
  37. @Twinkie

    Back in 1876 they had a ridiculously fraud-filled election–the so called “highest turnout ever” was just the highest fraud level ever–with turnout more than ten percentage points above the last presidential election with two of the most boring and uninspiring candidates ever, and boring and stupid “issues” ever.

    But–at least in those days there were self-proclaimed Republican newspapers and self-proclaimed Democratic newspapers. Everybody took sides and was proud of it. Both sides proudly called the other side cheats and proclaimed their own sides innocence.

    It was kinda fun!

    That is what we need today.

    Can’t somebody just tell the truth about who they are–for once!

    (P.S. The new President was chosen _one_ day before the term of the old President expired. Congress chose them using the provisions of Article 2 Section 1 and the Twelfth Amendment, one vote per state. The Republicans (then as now) held the majority of state delegations so they voted to put the Republican candidate, Rutherford Hayes, into office. He served a boring four years while the Democratic newspapers referred to him as a fraud–and everybody lived happily ever after.)

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  38. @Observator

    “All this was inspired by the principle – which is quite true in itself – that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility….”

    Funny how the GOP is profiting from what Hitler realized back in 1923.

    As far as I know, the quote is fake. Hitler never said it.

  39. @VinnyVette

    What’s funny about outlandish claims like “E Harding’s” is that there’s no evidence for it. Sure, the “Trump killed xxx people” meme is all over the media and some dopes like E Harding repeat it, but I haven’t seen a single reputable poll showing that there is widespread acceptance for it. Twitter is a pretty good place for judging public opinion and believe me, in NY the blame for Covid deaths is squarely on Cuomo, which is right and appropriate. A reminder — in late March Trump wanted to put NYC under a full lockdown. No travel anywhere, shelter in place. Cuomo said no!

  40. @E. Harding

    he … killed one in a thousand Americans

    You have no case that Corona killed one in a thousand Americans, or that Trump worsened the epidemic in any way.
    I will point out the number of lives Trump saved – in Syria, the greatest moral achievement of his administration. Obama/Hillary started the Syrian war, arming any terrorist or criminal in the country they could find. The Syrian war by 2016 had killed 500,000 people. Hillary proposed to intensify the war, to bomb the country relentlessly (“no fly zone”) and put tens of thousands of US troops there.
    It is reasonable to assume Hillary would have killed another 500,000 people in Syria.
    Trump, to his everlasting moral credit, opposed that war. He wanted out, and he got us out. Through inaction he let the Russians and Assad win, which was exactly the right thing to do.
    That war is not completely over, but it is now much smaller than it was thanks to Trump.
    I say he saved 500,000 lives. Thank you, Donald Trump.

    these people do not have very high IQs

    Trump voters can find Syria on a map. Can you?

  41. Rosie says:
    @Talha

    Women of color voting with their feet (their sheets?!).

    Wow! Thanks for this, Talha. I can’t think of any clearer indication that they know damned well they are peddling lies about White men. No, they’re not high on their own supply. They’re just lying straight through their teeth.

    • Replies: @Talha
  42. Rosie says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    If the putative election theft is not stopped by the court, Harris, a sociopath who whored her way into politics, will soon be our president.

    Yes, indeed. Absent some extenuating circumstance, like desperate poverty or drug addiction, prostitution (in form or in substance), is as sure an indication as any of antisocial personality in women

  43. That’s the more sensationalist reading of the results, anyway.

    A less sensational reading, but one more relevant, is that the majority of voters think the Democrat Party is capable of defrauding the people of this country.

  44. @Twinkie

    The media never had objectivity. What they did have in the past was a pretense based on trying to state things in a “middle-of-the-road” way. In a sense, they are still doing that. I went to dinner last night with an acquaintance who said he can’t believe half of Americans voted for “a dictator” and that Europeans have to consider the US a potential threat–as in, a potential military aggressor. (Whaaaahhh??) He gets a lot of his information now directly from Democrats, I think, since he signed up with some service from the Sanders campaign that sends out updates and service announcements.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  45. ‘The inauguration is over two months away. If there is nothing to find, what’s the harm in looking? Isn’t convincing those sixty million highly skeptical voters that Trump lost fair and square the first step towards achieving the unity we’ve heard so many calls for over the last several days?’

    It’s not even that long. The Electoral College certifies the results on December 14th or something.

    If they weren’t afraid, they’d let us paddle around until then. It’s barely a month off now.

  46. @Justvisiting

    ‘…But–at least in those days there were self-proclaimed Republican newspapers and self-proclaimed Democratic newspapers. Everybody took sides and was proud of it. Both sides proudly called the other side cheats and proclaimed their own sides innocence…’

    That’s exactly my point. The real death blow here is the death of a free media.

    Back in the day, they all lied — but they weren’t all on the same page.

    Now, they are on the same page. I really am not sure what to do about that.

  47. @Chrisnonymous

    ‘… who said he can’t believe half of Americans voted for “a dictator” and that Europeans have to consider the US a potential threat…’

    That always irritated me, intellectually. Trump is a dictator.

    Right. Buffoon, arguably. Hitler, no. We may get to Hitler — but Trump ain’t him.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  48. Twinkie says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Fraud or not, the real tactic that threw this election where it normally would not have gone was the exploitation of fear of one corona virus to establish mail-in voting.

    Indeed!

    Count this as just more damage from the cure that is worse than the virus that causes no harm to something like 99.9% of the people who catch it. “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

    My wife and I have a different perspective on COVID, but we still voted in person. To us, taking part in the electoral process is a sacred duty and right of every citizen. Absentee-voting should only be allowed in exceptional circumstances, e.g. serving overseas, bed-ridden due to illness, etc.

    If you are unworried enough about the pandemic to attend BLM rallies, go to bars, or (later) participate in public celebrations for Biden, you can come to the polling place, prove your identity, and discharge the sacred duty in person.

    Democrats ramrodded extensive absentee voting, because they knew lazy leftist and “machine” voters went their way and because in-person (esp. late-deciding) voting would favor Trump greatly. Well, kudos to them – they prepared the battlefield for their favor while Trump just walked in to the ambush with apparently misguided confidence.

    Politics is not unlike war or person-to-person combat. I always teach my children that in Judo and Jujitsu *as well as real fighting,” you don’t put yourself in a bad position and try to work out of it. You don’t even fight from a neutral position. From the get-go, you always find some biomechanical or positional advantage and then snowball that advantage into a dominating victory.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  49. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    Actions speak louder than words. If these ladies are projecting the “oppressive white man” shtick, they certainly don’t mind getting down with massa’.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  50. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    Actions speak louder than words.

    Always look at revealed preferences, not stated ones.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @anon
  51. anon[166] • Disclaimer says:
    @Twinkie

    Talha

    Actions speak louder than words

    Twinkie
    Always look at revealed preferences, not stated ones.

    Pay attention to what they do, not what they say. – Manosphere

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
  52. @Buzz Mohawk

    Kamala Harris is a dangerous psychopath…

    I swear, under penalty of perjury, I can see her horns.

    Evil to the fucking core.

  53. Wielgus says:
    @neutral

    Certainly most Europeans who think about the US system find the Electoral College aspect a little bewildering.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  54. Source : https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/11/james-howard-kunstler/the-worm-in-the-machine/

    The worm in the machine, perhaps: a simple algorithm (i.e., set of coded instructions) embedded in the Dominion vote tabulation software — product of a company, to remind you, partially owned by Senator Feinstein’s husband, Richard C. Blum, and represented by lobbyist Nadeam Elshami, Nancy Pelosi’s former chief of staff. It was Mr. Elshami’s mission to visit state legislators around the country and persuade them to adopt (that is, purchase) the Dominion system. The algorithm appears to subtract votes from one candidate and add them to the other candidate. It’s a feature, not a bug.

    The Dems own the machines. Would they cheat?

    • Replies: @Joseph Doaks
  55. @DanHessinMD

    In Australia, you only have to attend, have your name crossed out on the copy of the electoral roll and receive a ballot. You can then walk out without voting but nobody does. Perhaps they think it’s illegal. A very small number just put a blank ballot in the box. If you wish, you can just write rude comments on the ballot. An even smaller number do that although it’s perfectly legal.

    Voting in council elections are also subject to the same law. There doesn’t appear to be any enforcement of the law for those elections. I’ve never voted in a Council election because I’ve never known anything about any candidate and I’ve never had the opportunity to vote for a Party candidate. The Parties don’t usually have policies for councils so don’t usually put up candidates.

    There is enforcement for State and Federal elections but it doesn’t seem very reliable. I’ve known people who were fined and others who weren’t and couldn’t make rhyme or reason of it. [email protected]

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
  56. @Wielgus

    most Europeans who think about the US system find the Electoral College aspect a little bewildering.

    Most Americans don’t have the slightest clue how the Electoral College works–and the mass media is doing its best to keep them in the dark.

    The bizarre American system was the result of political compromise–states agreed to join the Union in exchange for having some of their autonomy preserved.

    Once that is understood, the Electoral College process starts to make some sense.

  57. @Colin Wright

    Hitler, no. We may get to Hitler — but Trump ain’t him.

    Alas.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @A123
  58. @Donald A Thomson

    In Australia, you only have to attend, have your name crossed out on the copy of the electoral roll and receive a ballot. You can then walk out without voting but nobody does. Perhaps they think it’s illegal. A very small number just put a blank ballot in the box. If you wish, you can just write rude comments on the ballot. An even smaller number do that although it’s perfectly legal.

    This is what everyone is told to believe, but it is absolutely wrong. Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 s245(1).

    COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL ACT 1918 – SECT 245
    Compulsory voting

    (1) It shall be the duty of every elector to vote at each election.

    (Emphasis mine).

    s239 and s240 of the same Act make clear how ballots are to be marked, for the Senate and House of Representatives, respectively.

    The law is clear, and the fact that people think it’s the exact opposite is because of deliberate misrepresentation in a feeble rhetorical attempt to pretend that it’s not “really” compulsory; “all you have to do is get your name ticked” and other such balderdash. To fully comply with the law, you must cast a valid vote (a defence can be that you made an attempt to do so).

    A voter must mark a valid ballot: the fact that under anonymous voting nobody can check, doesn’t alter what the law actually says.

    Otherwise it would be ‘legal’ to drive at 140km/hr so long as you weren’t apprehended. That’s not how it works.

    Disclosure: I adamantly oppose mandatory voting because it upregulates low-information voters. I don’t vote; I actively discourage people from voting; and I refuse to pay the fine. I send back the fine notice marked

    I’m not paying this. Ordinal preference aggregation was proved – by Arrow in 1950 – to predictably misrepresent social preferences. ‘Preferential’ voting makes it worse, not better – again, provably.

    (The actual version has some more ‘vernacular’ expressions).

  59. @anon

    Talha

    Actions speak louder than words

    Twinkie

    Always look at revealed preferences, not stated ones.

    Manosphere

    Pay attention to what they do, not what they say.

    οἱ πλεῖστοι ἄνθρωποι κακοί. (hoi pleistoi anthropoi kakoi)

    Most people are shit. – Bias of Priene (6th century BCE – “2500 years of being right, so far“).

    NB: kakoi was almost certainly used deliberately – because it has a vast array of different meanings, including but not limited to bad, worthless, useless, vile, ugly, shameful, dishonourable, unfortunate, depraved, wretched, low, mean, hideous, vulgar.

    The scatological connotation (my preferred version) is because κακός (kakos – bad etc) is cognate with κᾰκκᾰ́ω – to defecate/shit.

    I don’t like the use of ‘bad’/’evil’ etc because it implies intentional behaviour – but most men are shit without intending to be (and sometimes, while intending otherwise).

    That is why “Most men are shit” is my preferred version.

    Bias had a bunch of alternatives if he was trying to make a specific point about lack of philosophical adequacy: like all the Ancient Grecians, he was fond of plays on words and they didn’t happen by accident.

    Plus, Bias had a contemporary whose nickname was “Shithead” (affectionately).

  60. @V. K. Ovelund

    ‘Alas.’

    That’s the worst of it. I don’t want Hitler. I want to go back to some place reasonably tolerant, free, and predictable — say, America about 1963.

    I don’t even want to have to worry about this crap. I want to go catch a salmon.

    But no. I have to fight the good fight. And will we ever get back to any place decent?

    I doubt it. Humpty Dumpty’s fallen off the fucking wall, and we’re not putting him back together again.

    I fear it’s just a matter of putting over our version of hell instead of theirs.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  61. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Colin Wright

    I want to go back to some place reasonably tolerant, free, and predictable — say, America about 1963.

    Yeah, I’m starting to think that the balance was about right in the early to mid 1960s. Throughout the West. Things were still perfectly tolerable in the 70s and 80s – maybe a bit worse in some areas (and possibly even a bit better in others) but the West could still be described as a civilisation. But it was starting to become less stable and less predictable.

    Then the Cold War ended and everything fell apart. Perversely the end of the Cold War was a disaster for the West and especially for the US. It unleashed a wave of madness, arrogance, self-righteousness and decadence.

    I suspect that the change from a situation in which there’s a balance of great powers to a unipolar situation is always likely to be disastrous. When Rome’s power was balanced by other powers (such as Carthage and Macedonia) the Romans could not afford to descend into decadence and madness. One Rome established itself as hegemon of the civilised world Rome started its descent into decadence and insanity.

  62. That fraud occurred is so obvious, that the more the phony establishment media shills and democrat party leaders try to dispute that fraud, the dumber and less credible they look. The very FACT, that these people announced, they did not hide it but announced that they would seek to remove the legally elected president from office even before his first day in office and then proceeded with a bogus Russian Collusion accusation followed by other absurd accusations IS PROOF ENOUGH THAT THEY INTENED FRAUD ALL ALONG AND THEY DID INDEED ACCOMPLISH THAT FRAUD BY CRIMINAL MEANS. JOE BIDEN is an unvetted,long time, utterly corrupt swamp politician who doesn’t deserve to rightfully be dogcatcher of a small U.S. village, let alone president of the U.S. The media has covered his crimes and are therefore partners in his criminality. His running mate is a corrupt politician from California and that says everything there is to know about her.

    • Replies: @Supply and Demand
  63. A123 says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Hitler, no. We may get to Hitler — but Trump ain’t him.

    Alas.

    The correct analogy is BIDEN = HITLER.

    Adolf Hitler was this goofy guy that snuck into power via an election. He then plunged the world into fire and killed millions. In absolute terms, Russian Christians (~30MM dead) came off worst from his rampage.

    Biden is this goofy guy that is trying to sneak into power via an election. We know that he is mentally damaged and is willing to take nuclear armed America head-to-head with nuclear armed Russia on behalf of his son’s Burisma paycheck.

    The big difference is that we can still head off this crisis. We can prevent Führer BIDEN from stealing the election.

    PEACE 😇

  64. @RoatanBill

    “The Dems own the machines. Would they cheat?”

    The question is: is there a Democrat who, given the opportunity, would not cheat?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  65. @Dr. Charles Fhandrich

    You seem to have caught Biden derangement syndrome

    • Replies: @Dr. Charles Fhandrich
  66. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Joseph Doaks

    The question is: is there a Democrat who, given the opportunity, would not cheat?

    Is there a politician of any stripe who wouldn’t cheat if he thought he could get away with it?

    • Replies: @vinteuil
  67. @Supply and Demand

    You seem to not be aware that Joe Biden IS deranged.

  68. vinteuil says:
    @dfordoom

    Is there a politician of any stripe who wouldn’t cheat if he thought he could get away with it?

    Enoch Powell wouldn’t cheat. The thought would never even occur to him.

    Much as you might like to think so, we’re not all like you.

  69. @dfordoom

    When the dust settles, the polls are going to turn out to be pretty close, with the exception of the upper Midwest again. There is something the pollsters are missing there (assuming it’s something other than collusion).

  70. @DanHessinMD

    Re: the high Wisconsin turnout, it wasn’t that much higher than in 2016. The change was less than in most states.

    Younger college-educated white men turning away from Trump may have balanced the urban results somewhat.

    But it’s obvious a lot of fraud and irregularities occurred. It’s going to take more than statistical evidence to make an electoral difference.

  71. @nebulafox

    This is the Deep State operating in the open, bragging about even.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS